RCBS 1500 chargemaster vs lee perfect powder measure

[Linko]

I have a RCBS 1500 Chargemaster with the reprogramming and brass insert. I also have a basic LEE powder measure. I find the LEE is faster and gets me very close to the target weight before trickling.

Big difference in price between these two! I think I am going to keep using the LEE. I dont see the benefit of the RCBS unit much. would think a Harrells would be even closer to the target weight. Much faster loading and quieter.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Whatever floats your boat. Nice thing about the Chargemaster is when I'm load testing multiple rifles at a time, all I have to do to adjust the charge weight is punch in a new weight and I know I'm right on no matter what type of powder I'm using. Takes a lot of trial and error to get a powder thrower right where you want it because they throw extruded and ball powders differently. Try throwing IMR 4198 or IMR 800X with your LEE measure and then tell me if you still prefer it over the Chargemaster...

You usually need to throw under weight then trickle with a measure if you want it dead on for every round. Chargemaster does the trickling for me. Theres no way the LEE can be as accurate as the Chargemaster. Like you said "the LEE gets me very close to the target weight before trickling". I'd rather just push one button on a Chargemaster and not have to worry about any of that. It gets me RIGHT ON my target weight and I do NOT have to manually trickle to get there.

The Chargemaster is not as fast as a thrower, but it doesn't need to be if you are completing a round from start to finish. I press the 'dispense' button on the Chargemaster, lube a case, run it up in the press to size it, prime it on the down stroke of the ram, wipe the lube off, and the Chargemaster has had the charge waiting for me. So I throw the charge in and seat the bullet. Round fully complete. Of course you need multiple presses or a turret press to do it this way so you can have your sizer and seating die ready at the same time.

Don't undestand the comment on a measure being quieter. Of course it is, but the Chargemaster is not loud by any means. Doubt it would even bother a librarian

 

[jds holler]

I don't have the Lee measure, but I can see using one of them for certain jobs. Comparing it to the Charge master though is apples and oranges.

My powder measuring jobs and which measure I use depend on several factors: the particular cartridge, quantity, load size, accuracy requirements, grain size, -- I'd hate to be limited to just one measure.

Most of my loading is done with a Uniflow with either large or small cylinder inserts, but I'm not adverse from even using a scoop for some jobs. When I get a nostalgic feeling, I'll even break out this old sweetheart. jd

 

[Jarhead6870]

I posted this on another forum but thought it approperiate and the results informative for this thread.

I just completed a test of ammunition with powder measured three different ways using H4350. First I dropped the entire powder load of 40.8 grains using JUST the Chargemaster with the double inserts from MDM12 here on the "Hide". Then I dropped the weight to 40.6 grains on the Chargemaster, left the powder in the pan on the Chargemaster and trickled up to 40.8 and third I dropped 40.6 grains into my pan, transferred it to my beam scale and then trickled it up to 40.8. The results:

Chargemaster ONLY, full charge 15 rounds - ES 18, SD 5.8
Dropped light and trickled on Chargemaster 10 rounds - ES 23, SD 8.2
Dropped light and trickled on beam scale 10 rounds- ES 15, SD 5.4

Dropping light and trickling on the beam scale has been by normal procedure and the numbers are in line with other batches I've run over the chronograph. While these numbers may not be adequate for Benchrest or F-Class shooters, they are certainly capable enough for steel. My initial goal for this test was to compare the loads directly from the Chargemaster with ones trickled on a beam scale but decided to go ahead and try trickling on the Chargemaster's digital scale to see what effect it would have. The time saved between loading straight from the Chargemaster and trickling is measurable and considering the SD from just the CM, worth consideration. YMMV.

Let me add; there's more to reloading good ammunition than dropping a powder charge.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

I posted this on another forum but thought it approperiate and the results informative for this thread.

I just completed a test of ammunition with powder measured three different ways using H4350. First I dropped the entire powder load of 40.8 grains using JUST the Chargemaster with the double inserts from MDM12 here on the "Hide". Then I dropped the weight to 40.6 grains on the Chargemaster, left the powder in the pan on the Chargemaster and trickled up to 40.8 and third I dropped 40.6 grains into my pan, transferred it to my beam scale and then trickled it up to 40.8. The results:

Chargemaster ONLY, full charge 15 rounds - ES 18, SD 5.8
Dropped light and trickled on Chargemaster 10 rounds - ES 23, SD 8.2
Dropped light and trickled on beam scale 10 rounds- ES 15, SD 5.4

Dropping light and trickling on the beam scale has been by normal procedure and the numbers are in line with other batches I've run over the chronograph. While these numbers may not be adequate for Benchrest or F-Class shooters, they are certainly capable enough for steel. My initial goal for this test was to compare the loads directly from the Chargemaster with ones trickled on a beam scale but decided to go ahead and try trickling on the Chargemaster's digital scale to see what effect it would have. The time saved between loading straight from the Chargemaster and trickling is measurable and considering the SD from just the CM, worth consideration. YMMV.

Let me add; there's more to reloading good ammunition than dropping a powder charge.

Though the CM proved to be very accurate in your test, it proves nothing either way you look at it. There are too many other factors at play. If the first 10 rounds were fired on a clean bore, then the barrel is changing with fouling. If the barrel was fouled, you would have to consider that some of the rounds started out with a cold bore. Then you cannot guarantee consistency in primer flashould sizes. Was neck tension and other brass prep steps measured and accounted for? That will cause slightly varying speeds as well.

I am a CM fan and I realize your test shows the CM performed well, but the data cannot be conclusive. If you did your test 10 different times on ten different rifles, the results would be all over the place

 

[Linko]

Whatever floats your boat. Nice thing about the Chargemaster is when I'm load testing multiple rifles at a time, all I have to do to adjust the charge weight is punch in a new weight and I know I'm right on no matter what type of powder I'm using. Takes a lot of trial and error to get a powder thrower right where you want it because they throw extruded and ball powders differently. Try throwing IMR 4198 or IMR 800X with your LEE measure and then tell me if you still prefer it over the Chargemaster...

You usually need to throw under weight then trickle with a measure if you want it dead on for every round. Chargemaster does the trickling for me. Theres no way the LEE can be as accurate as the Chargemaster. Like you said "the LEE gets me very close to the target weight before trickling". I'd rather just push one button on a Chargemaster and not have to worry about any of that. It gets me RIGHT ON my target weight and I do NOT have to manually trickle to get there.

The Chargemaster is not as fast as a thrower, but it doesn't need to be if you are completing a round from start to finish. I press the 'dispense' button on the Chargemaster, lube a case, run it up in the press to size it, prime it on the down stroke of the ram, wipe the lube off, and the Chargemaster has had the charge waiting for me. So I throw the charge in and seat the bullet. Round fully complete. Of course you need multiple presses or a turret press to do it this way so you can have your sizer and seating die ready at the same time.

Don't undestand the comment on a measure being quieter. Of course it is, but the Chargemaster is not loud by any means. Doubt it would even bother a librarian

I have only used the Lee with varget. So I completely understand it is limited use throwing

one thing on the chargemaster. I am loading 2 decimals. eg: 24.70 I have never been able to have the chargemaster dispense accurately and consistantly. for the example weight the CM drops a wide range, like 24.5 to 25.0 . if I am looking for 24.7 I am not loading 24.79 for example. Perhaps my CM is incapable of accurate dispensing. You sound to have much success with your CM. wish mine was working like yours.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

I have only used the Lee with varget. So I completely understand it is limited use throwing

one thing on the chargemaster. I am loading 2 decimals. eg: 24.70 I have never been able to have the chargemaster dispense accurately and consistantly. for the example weight the CM drops a wide range, like 24.5 to 25.0 . if I am looking for 24.7 I am not loading 24.79 for example. Perhaps my CM is incapable of accurate dispensing. You sound to have much success with your CM. wish mine was working like yours.

Thats awful. Check these things below.

Make sure it is properly leveled with all 4 legs making good contact.

Go through a full calibration with the check weights and make sure it is warmed up before use. Fortunately mine works perfectly immediately upon startup.

After calibration, write down the weight shown when you place the powder pan on the scale. Then zero it out. This number will allow you to use your powder pan as a check weight every time you remove it from the scale to charge a case. Of course it will now be shown as a negative value. If it's ever off, just re-zero the scale before dispensing the next charge.

Don't close that dust and air blocking door. Don't even touch it. Maybe even remove it until you're done loading.

Make sure your programming is not set to trickle too fast.

Makes sure you don't have any substantial air currents moving through the room. Especially crossing directly over the scale.

I don't use the auto dispense function. I always press the dispense button so I can make sure the scale is not drifting from zero.

If you move it to drain powder from the hopper, be sure to check the zero with the pan or re-calibrate it once it's back in its normal spot.

 

[Jarhead6870]

Thought the CM proved to be very accurate in your test, it proves nothing either way you look at it. There are too many other factors at play. If the first 10 rounds were fired on a clean bore, then the barrel is changing with fouling. If the barrel was fouled, you would have to consider that some of the rounds started out with a cold bore. Then you cannot guarantee consistency in primer flashould sizes. Was neck tension and other brass prep steps measured and accounted for? That will cause slightly varying speeds as well.

I am a CM fan and I realize your test shows the CM performed well, but the data cannot be conclusive. If you did your test 10 different times on ten different rifles, the results would be all over the place

As I mentioned in the last sentence, there is more to good, consistent ammunition than dropping a powder charge. The purpose of the post was to give examples of data I collected on one test and provide numbers instead of just opinion. As per your statement regarding clean bore, cold bore, fouled bore, etc., these same statements, while true, can be made for any test regarding velocities and load data obtained from a rifle and chronograph as no two rounds are ever going to be fired under the exact same bore conditions. The bore changes with each and every shot with fouling, throat erosion, temperature, etc.. This said, the rounds loaded and shot using the beam scale are very close to my numbers over the life of this barrel when tested at different Density Altitudes, ambient temperatures and bore temperatures/conditions for 10 round samplings.

As for case prep, brass condition and bullets, nothing special. The brass I loaded was from the same lot and prepped in the same 100 round batch. It was as close to identical as I could get using tools and techniques available to me, the ordinary shooter. The brass was 5 times fired, unsorted/unweighed factory Lapua brass with untouched flash-holes and primer pockets, no-turn necks, annealed, sized and loaded on a Redding T-7 press with Redding dies. Bullets were not sorted or measured or weighed, they were straight from the box.

When someone asks me about shooting, rifles, equipment or reloading, I always ask, "what's your purpose and what's your budget?". For my needs, this ammunition is good enough to shoot steel out to 1500 yards and participate in local F-Class matches for fun. For competitive F-Class and Benchrest guys, like many of you on this forum, it's not good enough. But, then again, for some it's never good enough...that's why you push yourselves and compete.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

As I mentioned in the last sentence, there is more to good, consistent ammunition than dropping a powder charge. The purpose of the post was to give examples of data I collected on one test and provide numbers instead of just opinion. As per your statement regarding clean bore, cold bore, fouled bore, etc., these same statements, while true, can be made for any test regarding velocities and load data obtained from a rifle and chronograph as no two rounds are ever going to be fired under the exact same bore conditions. The bore changes with each and every shot with fouling, throat erosion, temperature, etc.. This said, the rounds loaded and shot using the beam scale are very close to my numbers over the life of this barrel when tested at different Density Altitudes, ambient temperatures and bore temperatures/conditions for 10 round samplings.

As for case prep, brass condition and bullets, nothing special. The brass I loaded was from the same lot and prepped in the same 100 round batch. It was as close to identical as I could get using tools and techniques available to me, the ordinary shooter. The brass was 5 times fired, unsorted/unweighed factory Lapua brass with untouched flash-holes and primer pockets, no-turn necks, annealed, sized and loaded on a Redding T-7 press with Redding dies. Bullets were not sorted or measured or weighed, they were straight from the box.

When someone asks me about shooting, rifles, equipment or reloading, I always ask, "what's your purpose and what's your budget?". For my needs, this ammunition is good enough to shoot steel out to 1500 yards and participate in local F-Class matches for fun. For competitive F-Class and Benchrest guys, like many of you on this forum, it's not good enough. But, then again, for some it's never good enough...that's why you push yourselves and compete.

Thanks for the info. It was an interesting test and it showed us a little bit of positive info for the CM. I just wanted to make it clear to folks that the data could not be conclusive. To me, the only way to check the accuracy of a given scale is to check it with a more accurate scale.

I verify my CM by checking the thrown weights on a Gem Pro 250 which measures down to increments of 0.02 grains. Even though the CM only measure to +/- 0.1gr, I almost always find my thrown weights to be within 0.04gr when checked on the GemPro for accuracy. There are a few rare occasions where I have seen a difference of 0.06gr, but it is pretty rare and only happens with long extruded powders that may dump two kernels when it's trying to trickle a single kernel. That's amazing to me for a scale that's only supposed to have an accuracy of +/- 0.1 gr. Don't know if a other folks' CM's can be, or are, that accurate. Maybe I got a cherry machine, but I am very pleased with it.

 

[Homerange]

Linko, I've got both and for ball powers the Lee is accurate and fast. Anything else, you can stick it where the sun don't shine.

one thing on the chargemaster. I am loading 2 decimals. eg: 24.70 I have never been able to have the chargemaster dispense accurately and consistantly. for the example weight the CM drops a wide range, like 24.5 to 25.0 . if I am looking for 24.7 I am not loading 24.79 for example. Perhaps my CM is incapable of accurate dispensing. You sound to have much success with your CM. wish mine was working like yours.

I've not long got a CM and the first thing I did was try the MacD's straw trick but their straws over here are too small.
So then I turned up an insert for the dispensing tube and it's so accurate you can watch it trickle individual kernels.
I did a LOT of research on this forum and online before I nabbed mine and to say I'm pleased is a massive understatement.
All the mods so far have been the insert but some tweaking of the internal programming is needed to lessen the trickle time and make the whole throw time shorter. You can find all the info needed to turn the CM into a faultless bit of kit on this forum.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Yeah most any powder measure is pretty accurate with ball powder. My RCBS will easily stay within .1gr with ball powder so long as the powder baffle is in place. Long extruded powder is a different story. Don't think there's a powder measure out there that can fully tame the inconsistencies of throws with long extruded powder.

A good powder measure and the RCBS Chargemaster compliment each other well to quickly throw all makes of powder. I recommend having both. But for all around accuracy with all types of powders, the CM can't be beat by a measure alone.

 

[Twoboxer]

Unhappy with what MY Chargemaster actually threw, I began using it to throw low and trickle up to target on an A&D FX120i. Probably did >1k this way, and saw just how much MY Chargemaster actually varied from target regardless of the type of powder used. Last year I recorded a few of these runs as tests and posted in another forum where "my Chargemaster is dead on all day long" comments were frequent. Here's a representative example:

Powder: H335
Targets: 12 different targets from 43.2gr to 47.1gr, 0.3gr or 0.4gr apart.
Total Loads: 10 x 3 loads, 2 x 9 loads, total 48 loads.

According to the A&D FX120i, how did the RCBS Chargemaster do?

Loads within +/- 0.06gr of target = 33 or 68.8%
Loads within +/- 0.1gr of target = 41 or 85.4%
Loads not within +/- 0.1gr of target = 7 or 14.6%

When missing the target load, by more than +/- 0.1gr, how far off were they?

+0.5gr, +0.12gr, -0.12gr, -0.14gr, -0.16gr, -0.32gr, -1.04gr

Does the RCBS miss more often High, or Low?

Exactly on target: 4
Higher than target: 18
Lower than target: 26

As I said, those kinds of variations represent MY typical experience with MY CM in MY reloading environment. YMMV . . . but I suspect not by much lol.

 

[CJ6]

View attachment 1000953 I have a RCBS 1500 Chargemaster with the reprogramming and brass insert. I also have a basic LEE powder measure. I find the LEE is faster and gets me very close to the target weight before trickling.

Big difference in price between these two! I think I am going to keep using the LEE. I dont see the benefit of the RCBS unit much. would think a Harrells would be even closer to the target weight. Much faster loading and quieter.

Don't want to burst your bubble ....But the Lee scoopes are faster between grain/powder sizes/weights.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Unhappy with what MY Chargemaster actually threw, I began using it to throw low and trickle up to target on an A&D FX120i. Probably did >1k this way, and saw just how much MY Chargemaster actually varied from target regardless of the type of powder used. Last year I recorded a few of these runs as tests and posted in another forum where "my Chargemaster is dead on all day long" comments were frequent. Here's a representative example:

Powder: H335
Targets: 12 different targets from 43.2gr to 47.1gr, 0.3gr or 0.4gr apart.
Total Loads: 10 x 3 loads, 2 x 9 loads, total 48 loads.

According to the A&D FX120i, how did the RCBS Chargemaster do?

Loads within +/- 0.06gr of target = 33 or 68.8%
Loads within +/- 0.1gr of target = 41 or 85.4%
Loads not within +/- 0.1gr of target = 7 or 14.6%

When missing the target load, by more than +/- 0.1gr, how far off were they?

+0.5gr, +0.12gr, -0.12gr, -0.14gr, -0.16gr, -0.32gr, -1.04gr

Does the RCBS miss more often High, or Low?

Exactly on target: 4
Higher than target: 18
Lower than target: 26

As I said, those kinds of variations represent MY typical experience with MY CM in MY reloading environment. YMMV . . . but I suspect not by much lol.

Yeah I suppose quality can vary between machines. Its unfortunate that your CM is that far on on throws.

Did you perform the straw and programming modifications? I know that especially without the straw mod, it can clump up powder in the threads of the tube and dump clumps of powder when it's trying to trickle single kernels.

If my CM was that far off, I would call RCBS. I've never had to call them for anything, but I've always heard that their customer service is top notch

 

[Homerange]

Yeah I suppose quality can vary between machines. Its unfortunate that your CM is that far on on throws.

Did you perform the straw and programming modifications? I know that especially without the straw mod, it can clump up powder in the threads of the tube and dump clumps of powder when it's trying to trickle single kernels.

Before I got mine I wasn't aware of those threads on the tube and when I decided to go the insert way to control the dispensing so I thought I'd be a smartass and make an insert that wound in on those threads. Shite, did that turn my hair grey as it was very difficult to identify the thread. As the CM is made in China (mine is) I guessed it was a Metric thread and 9mm x 1.25 was what I came up with after much experimenting and measurement. This size and pitch is most unusual and nowhere could I find mention of it online as the CM dispensing tube thread. After much pissing around I dropped the idea and made a plain aluminium insert to a perfect push fit.

 

[Twoboxer]

Y. . . Did you perform the straw and programming modifications? I know that especially without the straw mod, it can clump up powder in the threads of the tube and dump clumps of powder when it's trying to trickle single kernels.. . .

The straw mod is designed to minimize overthrows. It cannot do anything else. Yes, I have a straw inserted.

The reprogramming mod instructions available are typically used to speed up the throws. That also does nothing to improve the unit's accuracy. Yes, I re-programmed the unit. But my approach was to make the final trickle*** (see edit below) as slow as possible. There was no significant change in the unit's performance with that setting maxed out (255).

IME, the issues with accuracy are the result of the load cell's varying performance, the dispenser's programming not waiting long enough for the scale to settle before thinking it has a good reading (which would slow the dispenser down), and the scale's anti-flutter programming.

I thought my CM was OK until I started to weigh every throw instead of one every 10 or 20 or so, and used a quality scale as the control.

I don't believe my CM's performance is a sample defect, though it may be related to a hostile RF environment in my home. The A&D FX120i performs flawlessly on the same bench.

*** ETA: for clarity, the parameter changed was S_S, Scale Sensitivity Timeout Slow Speed, time in ms.

 

[Linko]

The straw mod is designed to minimize overthrows. It cannot do anything else. Yes, I have a straw inserted.

The reprogramming mod instructions available are typically used to speed up the throws. That also does nothing to improve the unit's accuracy. Yes, I re-programmed the unit. But my approach was to make the final trickle as slow as possible. There was no significant change in the unit's performance with that setting maxed out (255).

IME, the issues with accuracy are the result of the load cell's varying performance, the dispenser's programming not waiting long enough for the scale to settle before thinking it has a good reading (which would slow the dispenser down), and the scale's anti-flutter programming.

I thought my CM was OK until I started to weigh every throw instead of one every 10 or 20 or so, and used a quality scale as the control.

I don't believe my CM's performance is a sample defect, though it may be related to a hostile RF environment in my home. The A&D FX120i performs flawlessly on the same bench.

Your comments are about when I am regarding the CM. I check every drop with FX120 also and find my best recourse for .00 accurate weights is program 1.0 low on the CM and trickle up the last 1.0

I use a dandy and it gets a work out thats for sure. I am going to look at slowing down the last seconds of the CM some more. I have the alumnium/brass insert I purchased from a member for the dispensing tube on the CM. I wonder if I should also have the soda straw in there too?

Under is better than over when it comes to the CM drops. its easier to trickle in a few than try taking out a few kernels.

 

[trapperdan]

When loading for a 17 hornet where 9.7 is min. and 10.0 is max load, do you gentleman feel the cm can consistently produce safe and accurate loads as a stand alone?

 

[Comrade Terry]

When loading for a 17 hornet where 9.7 is min. and 10.0 is max load, do you gentleman feel the cm can consistently produce safe and accurate loads as a stand alone?

No. I've seen charges off by 0.3 on my CM.

 

[Rust]

I have a few powder measures including the Lee. They pretty much sit on the shelf since the introduction of the Chargemaster. All my match loads use stick powder and using a traditional thrower requires trickling which is a time consuming PITA for 100 rounds.

Now I have learned to use the door to prevent any air movement from affecting the scale, warm it up for a half hour prior to final calibration, and use a quality surge suppressor/power conditioner, insure it's on a level surface. Since my press is on a separate stand from the Chargemaster I seat a bullet while dropping the next charge which cut my loading time about in half for 100 rounds. In larger cases that 0.1 gr as a percentage doesn't amount to much.

I don't worry too much about an extra fps or two ES as the wind has a lot more effect at 600 out to 1,000.